I know this idea is pretty far "out there", but what if you could have an aircraft hover over the structure and spray water, rather than dump it, like a giant shower? The whole idea of using water is that, with its high heat capacity, it absorbs the heat from the fire, as well as reducing its access to oxygen, but dumping it all at once obviously is bad for anything on the ground, but maybe showering it would work? I know, it's probably not feasible.

The foam that they drop from the tankers isn't as destructive as you make it seem. Living in Southern California my house was been hit by one and while you get coated in a red foam its not going to kill you.

Well, the roof just collapsed, so I guess pick your battles. Wait for the fire to collapse it or try to save it with water. They could also drop fire retardant on it, the foam isn't that heavy.

Hopefully they already evacuated everyone.

The news streams just started showing water being put on it, looks like the smoke is dying down, hopefully they can save it!

Yeah, it works just fine on forest fires. Not so much in urban settings.

But now that Trump has said it, a bazillion MAGAbots will be asking why they didn't use a plane, and start looking for a French conspiracy to destroy civilization or something.

I find comments like this one really strange.

What do you think is more likely? That there is not a single stream of water hitting it, or there are plenty of fire fighters at the scene you just happen not to have seen any pictures of them?

How's your armchair? Nice and comfy?

> I don't see a single stream of water hitting it in any of the live streams.

I saw on the live stream a couple of water jets, from aerial platforms, at the corners (probably as close as they could get with the trucks). But my guess is that most of the firefighting is happening on the ground level (some of it inside the building), out of sight from the distant cameras.

How much experience do you have in firefighting?